On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Marius Mauch kirjoitti: >> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:59:39 +0200 >> Jose Luis Rivero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 05:38:34PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: >>>> On 02:03 Tue 14 Oct , Jose Luis Rivero wrote: >>>>> There are some others sceneries but are not so common as the one >>>>> presented could be. Any decent solution for this case? >>>> There are only a few obvious ones, you'll have to pick which one >>>> you like best. Most of the other options basically duplicate these >>>> in some way or add more work to them for negligible gain: >>>> >>>> - Backport the ebuild from EAPI=2 to EAPI=0 >>> EAPI-2 to EAPI-0 could imply lot of changes (not talking about what is >>> going to happen when we release new and more feature rich EAPIs), and >>> changes usually come with bugs. The ebuild is committed directly to >>> stable implies bugs in stable, which for me is a no-go. >> >> Assuming the ebuild changes between foo-1 and foo-2 are mainly due to >> the change from EAPI=0 to EAPI=2 (which I'd expect to be true in many >> cases) you could just reuse the foo-1 ebuild for foo-3. >> >> If there are major differences between foo-1 and foo-2 not related to >> the EAPI change then the maintainer probably didn't want foo-2 to >> become stable anytime soon, so it's at least questionable if foo-3 >> should go straight to stable in the first place. >> >> And adding a new version directly to stable always comes with a risk, >> you can't eliminate that completely. It's all about risk assessment, >> and how much work you're willing to do or time you want to spend to >> minimize the risk. >> > > There's no need to commit straight to stable. Just make two different > new revisions for each EAPI. Then the arch teams can test it like usual.
Aha a perfect canidate use case for GLEP 55[1] that fends off 'why are there multiple versions of the same package' questions and complexities. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0055.html > > Regards, > Petteri > >
